Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Waste Management
Citation preview
1
DISCUSSION PAPER ON COLLECTION AND RECYCLING OF
WASTE PAPER IN INDIA
I. FOREWORD
II. INTRODUCTION
III. STRATEGIES ADOPTED BY OTHER COUNTRIES
IV. WASTE PAPER COLLECTION IN INDIA - PROBLEMS AND POTENTIAL
V. POLICY OPTIONS
VI. ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
2
I. Foreword
The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion has prepared this discussion
paper on “Collection and recycling of waste paper in India”, with the objective of developing
a suitable policy framework to define the obligations of producers and users, to sensitize the
citizens to improve the segregation, collection and reuse of waste paper in the country and
to evolve a sustainable and workable mechanism for achieving a significant level of recovery
of waste paper by 2025.
Post consumer paper, or waste paper, is an important renewable raw material
source for the paper industry and can contribute considerably towards reduction in its
imports. Its recycling is also important from the environmental perspective, as systematic
collection and recycling of waste paper can significantly reduce the generation of municipal
solid wastes. It has been estimated that recycling one tonne of waste paper results in a
saving of 70% raw material, 60% coal, 43% energy and 70 % water, as compared to making
virgin paper from wood. Finally, the recycling process also offers an opportunity for
generation of additional income and employment. According to some estimates, one tonne
of recycled paper saves approximately 17 trees, 2.5 barrels of oil, 4100 Kilowatt hours of
electricity, 4 cubic meters of landfill and 31,780 litres of water.
Views and suggestions are invited by 30th November, 2011 so that they can be
examined for development of a suitable policy on collection and recycling of waste paper.
3
II. Introduction
Paper is made up of cellulosic fibre sourced from plants. After consumption it often
makes its way to trash bins and thus comes to be termed as “waste paper”. This waste
paper when recovered becomes the reclaimed cellulose fibre base suitable for paper
making. Today the term “recycled fibre” is used to refer to the post consumer paper that
has been collected and reused to make paper. Use of recycled fibre for paper making has
been picking up the world over, including India.
The Indian paper industry uses wood, agricultural residues and waste paper as raw
materials. In the early 70’s, the share of waste paper used as raw material was only 7%,
whereas now it constitutes the major raw material base for paper industry with 47% share
in total production (Table 1).
Table-1: Shift in Raw Material Consumption Pattern
Year % Share
Wood Agro residue Waste Paper
1970 84 9 7
2000 39 31 30
2011 31 22 47
Source: Paper Industry
As of date, about 550 mills in India use waste paper as primary fibre source for paper,
paperboard and newsprint production. This waste paper is sourced indigenously as well as
through imports.
The present recovery and utilisation of waste paper by paper mills in India is 3.0
million tonnes annually, which translates to a recovery of 27% of the total paper and
paperboard consumed. This recovery rate is very low when compared to developed
countries like Germany-73%, Sweden-69%, Japan-60%, Western Europe-56%, USA-49% and
Italy-45%1. Due to inadequate availability of indigenous waste paper, Indian mills rely
heavily on imported waste paper to meet the raw material demand. The import bill has
increased significantly over the years. According to an estimate, the import of waste paper
1 Indian Paper Manufactures Associations (IPMA), 2010
4
has increased from 5.1 million USD in 1980 to one billion USD in 2011. India imports around
4.0 million tonnes of waste paper annually2 which is about 57% of its requirements.
Therefore, it is important to put in place suitable mechanisms that result in
increasing the effective recycling of post consumer paper for manufacturing. The designing
of such mechanisms and interventions lead to three major advantages:
First and foremost, the removal of post consumer paper from the garbage cycle
would considerably reduce the environmental load on the eco-system. It translates into
lesser requirements of land for dumping (it is estimated that as much as 5 million tonnes of
waste paper ends up in landfills today), lowering of formation of greenhouse gases
(methane) upon decomposition of cellulose and corresponding lowering of the requirement
of wood based fibre resources for papermaking. Further, use of recycled fibre in the
process leads to lower air emissions and energy use, which again lowers the carbon
footprint of the paper industry.
Second, this will lead to lowering of the import bill for waste paper. If there was a
mechanism to recover this paper, there would have been a considerable reduction in the
import bill. With paper and paperboard demand growing at an average of 7.8% per annum,
the industry is expected to meet an annual requirement of 24 million tonnes by 2025, which
is a quantum leap from the current level of over 11.1 million tonnes. It is estimated that
Indian paper industry would require over 16 million tonnes of waste paper by 2025 to meet
the increase in demand. If the industry has to depend on imports to meet the waste paper
requirement, the foreign exchange outgo could be as high as 6.4 billion USD (assuming, of
course, that the major exporters of today would be able to meet such high demand).
Last, but not the least, the process of collection of post consumer paper presents an
opportunity for income and employment generation3. It is estimated that about 31.2% of
India’s population is residing in urban areas distributed across various towns and cities,
covering a total population of around 377 million or about 94 million households. These
households generate around 2.6 million tonnes of dry recyclables per annum, out of which
1.3 million tonnes is contributed by paper only (50% of total dry recyclable composition),
which includes newspaper and magazines also. Based on current data base and actual cost
2
Indian Recycled Paper Mills Association (IRPMA), 2011
3 ITC – WOW (Waste out of Wealth) program
5
of collection, segregation and baling of dry recyclables, it is estimated that the gross
realization is to the tune of US $ 735 million per annum for a population cover of 377
million. This has the potential of going up substantially through integrated municipal solid
waste management and installation of recycling facilities.
Waste paper collection is an industry in itself. In the developed countries, a large
workforce of semi-skilled & skilled manpower is engaged in a scientific and organised
manner to improve the recovery targets for recovered paper. In India M/s ITC Ltd., a leading
paper manufacturer is running a programme for waste paper collection called ‘Wealth Out
of Waste’ (WOW) Model employing over 4,000 people. Such programmes offer a huge
potential for inclusive growth as setting up of facilities for dry waste management and value
addition requires a large workforce of semiskilled and unskilled manpower.
As per the thumb rule with every one percent increase in waste paper recovery, a
significant reduction in consumption of raw material, coal, power and water can be
achieved besides reducing the annual import bill and opening up of opportunities of
employment generation for skilled & semi-skilled manpower, as shown below:
(I) Savings of -
- 0.2 million tonnes of raw material,
- 0.16 million tonnes of coal,
- 2750 megawatt of installed capacity, and
- 7.7 million m3 water
(II) Reduction in-
- 0.02 million tonnes of GHG emission
- Import bill by 25 million USD
(III) Employment generation opportunity for 7000 additional persons.
A possible business model on source segregation and scientific handling of solid waste is
enclosed at Annexure-I.
6
III. Strategies Adopted by other Countries
In most of the developed nations, waste paper recycling is initiated, organised and
operated by the municipal authorities, supported by suitable national policy normally based
on the “polluter pays” principle. Legislations are formulated in the form of directives,
procurement policy guidelines, as well as voluntary agreements.
The collection mechanisms put in place are highly successful as indicated by
continuous improvement in the recovery rates of waste paper. These countries not only
meet their domestic requirements but also export large quantities of waste paper.
Few examples of such legislation are given below for illustration:
Legislation in European Union (EU)
Countries of the European Union follow the European Packaging Directive No. 94/62
(EEC and 2004/12/EC2). In these countries, responsibility for collection and recycling of
packaging waste lies with Packaging Recovery Organisation Europe, or PRO EUROPE, which
is an umbrella organisation of 33 national producers. PRO EUROPE uses a “Green Dot” as its
registered trademark. A ‘Green Dot’ on packaging signifies that a financial contribution has
been paid to a qualified national packaging recovery organisation. By contracting with the
green dot system, the companies responsible for producing packaging entrust their take-
back obligation to the scheme in return for an annual fee based on the type of packaging
materials used and on the amount of packaging put in the market. The printing of the
“Green Dot” is an indication that the packaging producer financially supports the integrated
system of collection and recycling of its packaging waste, which is mandatory in most EU
Countries.
In all the member states of EU, economic operators within the packaging chain
(manufacturer, packer/filler, distributor, and importer) are responsible for packaging waste
management and for providing data on the amount of recycled packaging put in the market.
Most of the compliance systems need to be approved and are monitored by the Ministry for
Environment or an independent body.
The work of the compliance schemes is financed by fees collected from companies
wishing to transfer the obligations imposed on them to the scheme. In general, the fee
7
structure is based on weight/ volume of the packaging material, per unit of packing or on a
membership/ fees based on turnover.
Legislation in Germany
In addition to the European Packaging Directive, Germany has the Waste Management Act
(1986), a Packaging Ordinance (1991) and a Voluntary Agreement of the Graphic Paper
Chain (1994).
Waste separation at the household level is a prominent feature of German waste
management systems, which is regulated at the municipal level. Households dispose paper,
cardboard, glass, biodegradable waste, light packaging (plastics, aluminium and tin), and the
residual household waste, separately.
In 1991, the German Government introduced the principle of producer responsibility
for used packaging and placed a legal obligation on trade and industry to take back and
recycle the packaging materials producers put into circulation. The consumers are required
to follow sorting guidelines established by the municipalities.
Legislation in Japan
Japan’s law for the promotion of sorted collection and recycling of container and packaging
was enforced in April 1997 by the Ministry of Environment. As per provisions, the sorted
waste is collected, stored and transported to the recycling companies by the municipalities.
Manufactures and business entities using containers and packages have to pay a recycling
fee to Japan Containers and Packaging Recycling Association (JCPRA), in accordance with the
volume they manufacture or sell. Japan has managed the zero solid waste principle very
effectively and minimised usage of scarce land space for landfills.
Legislation in USA
There is no national legislation in the United States requiring the development of packaging
recycling programmes or use of the Green Dot, as prevalent in Europe. Waste Management
regulations are the responsibility of each individual provincial and state government. The
local waste management system design and operations are the responsibility of individual
municipalities.
Details of extant legislative and compliance mechanisms in Europe are enclosed at
Annexure-II.
8
IV. Waste Paper Collection in India - Problems and Potential
In India the collection of waste paper is mainly performed by the informal sector, i.e., by rag
pickers and door to door collectors/vendors. As much as 95% of the collection of waste
paper in the country is carried out by the informal sector. The value chain comprises the
direct collectors from various source points and small shops – where primary sorting of the
waste into different categories takes place – and zonal segregation centres owned by
wholesalers where the waste material gets collected from small shops and baled for
dispatch to the end users. The current mechanism adopted for collection of waste paper in
India is shown in Table-2.
Table-2: Current Waste Paper Collection Mechanisms in India
Source Items Collected Collected by Quantity Collected (in Million tonnes/Annum)
Collection from households
Old newspaper & magazines
Weekend hawkers
1.50
Notebooks & textbooks
0.50
Annual scrap contracts of printers, publishers & converters
Paper trimmings, print rejects, overprint/misprint sheets and other waste
Contractors 0.25
Scrap contracts with industries, offices, libraries
Old corrugated cartons, examination answer sheets, library records, old office and library records etc.
Contractors 0.50
TOTAL
2.75
Source: ITC-WOW, Aug. 2011
Clearly, the existing institutional mechanisms are weak and lead to considerable leakages.
The life cycle analysis of different grades of paper, shown in Table-3, indicates the potential
for sizeable enhancement of recoveries, particularly for copier and creamwove paper from
offices and newspaper & packaging from households.
9
Table-3: Recovery Potential for Waste Paper
Grades of paper Potential Source of Generation
Generation/ Consumption
%
Type of waste
Collection Rate
%
Writing/Printing
Copier Paper Offices Business Establishment Others
50 40 10
Post Consumer
20
Cream wove Printing House Paper Traders
20 5
Pre Consumer
100
Households Schools/Colleges Offices Business Establishment Others
20 10 25 10 10
Post Consumer
20
Packaging Paper Converting House
15 Pre Consumer
100
Households Offices Business Establishment Others
20 5
50 10
Post Consumer
50
Newspaper Publishing House Distributors
20 5
Pre Consumer
100
Households Offices Business Establishment Others
40 10 15 10
Post Consumer
30
Source: Indian Recycled Paper Mills Association (IRPMA), 2011
10
Table 3A indicates the considerable potential for recovery of waste paper in India.
Recovery Potential
Writing/Printing
Creamwove
Copier Paper
Paper Grades Source of Generation Collection
Offices 50%
Business Establishments 40%
Others 10%
Households 20%
Schools/ Colleges 10%
Offices 25%
Business Establishments 10%
Others 10%
Printer house 20%
Paper traders 5%
Packaging Paper
Households 20%
Offices 5%
Business Establishments 50%
Others 10%
Converting house 15%
NewspaperHouseholds 40%
Offices 10%
Business Establishments 15%
Others 10%
Publishing house 20%
Distributors 5%
Collected Not Collected
20% 80%
20% 80%
50% 50%
100%
100%
100%
There exists a large potential for recovery of waste paper in India.
Source: Indian Recycled Paper Mills Association (IRPMA), 2011
30% 70%
TABLE: 3A
Existing Legal Framework in India for Solid Waste Management (SWM)
In India, solid waste management is a state function (Article 243W, 12th Schedule of
the Constitution of India). However, the Central Government has powers to enact laws and
frame rules for environmental protection. Accordingly, the Government of India has enacted
the Environment Protection Act (EPA) 1986, and has framed rules, under its provisions, for
managing and handling municipal solid wastes, biomedical wastes, hazardous wastes, etc.
11
Management of municipal solid waste is covered under state laws pertaining to
municipal governance, but all the issues relating to Solid Waste Management (SWM) are not
adequately addressed therein. In pursuance of a Public Interest Litigation filed in 1996 in the
Supreme Court (Special Civil Application No. 888 of 1996), the Supreme Court appointed an
expert committee to look into all aspects of SWM and to make recommendations to
improve the situation.
On the basis of the report, the Ministry of Environment and Forests issued the
Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2000 under the Environment
Protection Act 1986, pursuant to the EPA for expeditious management and handling of
MSW and has made it mandatory for all municipal authorities in the country to implement
these rules within a prescribed time frame.
Solid Waste Management Institutions and their functions are illustrated in Table-4.
Table-4: Solid Waste Management Institutions and Functions
Responsible institution Roles and responsibilities in SWM
Central Government Make laws and rules, frame policies; prepare guidelines, manuals and technical assistance; provides financial support; monitor implementation of laws and rules.
State Government Make state-level laws and rules, frame policies; prepare guidelines, manuals; and technical assistance, provide financial support; monitor implementation of laws and rules.
Municipal Authorities and State Government
Plan for SWM treatment facilities.
Municipal Authorities Collect, transport, treat and dispose of waste.
Municipal Authorities with the approval of State Government
Frame by laws, levy and collect fees.
Municipal Authorities and State and Central Governments
Finance SWM systems.
Source: Improving Municipal Solid Waste Management in India: A sourcebook for Policy Makers and Practitioners, World Bank Institute
12
Due to various reasons, the compliance with the above rules remains unsatisfactory in the
country today. The expert committee has identified the following deficiencies in the SWM
system in India.
No storage of waste at source
Only partial segregation of recyclable waste
No system of primary collection of waste at the doorstep
Irregular street sweeping
Inappropriate system of secondary storage of waste
Irregular transport of waste in open vehicles
No treatment of waste
Inappropriate disposal of waste at open dumping grounds
Details are enclosed at Annexure-III.
Engagement of Private Players through a Public Private Partnership (PPP) Model
Though solid waste management is mandatory for all municipal authorities in the country
and a significant budget is allocated for this purpose, the service is poorly performed, with
segregation, collection, treatment and disposal getting the least attention. Experience in
many countries shows that in certain circumstances, involving the private sector can
significantly improve solid waste management service quality. Thus private sector
participation could be considered in India also for collection of waste paper.
One viable option is to involve the private sector more extensively in providing
services, with the municipal authority moving from being a service provider to being a
regulator and service facilitator. The Wealth out of Waste (WOW) programme of M/s ITC
provides a model for such engagements in India.
In the year 2007, ITC started waste paper collection scheme under the WOW
programme, now spread across 6 cities in South India with an average monthly collection of
3000 tonnes of waste paper. Over 3 million citizens, 500,000 school children, 350 firms,
1000 commercial establishments and about 200 industries support WOW. Paper
manufacturers ITC and an infrastructure development company, M/s Ramky Infrastructures
Pvt. Ltd., have joined hands together to spread the programme across the country over the
next ten years.
13
Realising the potential of WOW, the Bangalore and Hyderabad municipalities have
come forward to develop waste collection ventures. The Bangalore venture is a joint
endeavour of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), ITC, Ramky Group and Solid
Waste Management Round Table, Bangalore. The scope includes setting up and
management of Dry Waste Collection Centre (DWCC). The Hyderabad venture is a project
of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, which promotes processing of
waste as per Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Rules, through door to door collection, and
transportation of waste to an integrated waste management facility where it is processed
and disposed in a scientific manner.
Details of the Waste Collection Model for Bangalore and Hyderabad are enclosed at
Annexure-IV.
14
V. Policy Options
Based on the foregoing discussions, the following policy options can be examined for
improving the collection and recycling of post consumer paper in India:
1. The government could formulate a policy on management of waste paper in line
with the e-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2011 as formulated by Ministry
of Environment and Forests. This policy will lay down the guidelines and procedures
for the producers, collection centers, dismantlers and the recyclers. In the present
case, the producers of waste would essentially be the domestic and commercial
consumers. The collection centers would be the facilities run by the municipalities,
preferably through outsourcing to private players. The dismantling function can be
correlated to the segregation step and the recycler would refer to the entity that
sells the waste paper to the mill.
Details of the E-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2011 are enclosed at
Annexure-V.
2. The government could simultaneously announce a scheme to provide incentives to
municipalities to meet source segregation targets by making it obligatory for
households to segregate the wastes and impose a fee on commercial users.
Alternatively, a fee structure for waste collection may be proposed along the lines of
the German model.
3. Guidelines for allocation of land on lease for development of sorting centers/
warehouses for sorting, baling and storage of waste paper could be developed by
the Ministry of Urban Development. These sorting centers / warehouses may be
developed through the PPP route by bidding system so that collected, sorted & baled
waste paper is directly sent to recycling units. Such centers could serve as a forward
linkage for the already existing informal sector.
4. Regulations may be formulated mandating use of shredders by all offices and
collection of shredded waste paper through contract agreements on annual basis.
5. Voluntary guidelines to contribute to waste paper collection efforts under CSR
could be put in place by industry and chambers of commerce to encourage private
sector participation.
15
VI. Issues for discussion
1. What should the implementation mechanism be for segregation, collection and recycling
of waste paper in a country like India?
2. The thrust of the policy should be on designing a self regulated sustainable system with
suitable incentives, if necessary, rather than a separate legislative framework or a
regulating agency for monitoring and enforcing compliance. How can this be achieved
with minimal regulatory control/ legislative intervention?
3. If minimal regulatory controls or legislative interventions are required to achieve a self
regulated sustainable system, then at what levels and in what form? Should the
intervention be at the Central, State, Municipality level or a combination of these?
4. How can the existing informal sector be integrated with mechanism of segregation,
collection and recycling effectively?
5. Is there any other existing model of waste paper segregation, collection and recycling in
any part of the country that could be adopted or replicated with or without
modifications?
6. What additional features could be included in the PPP model for making it more
attractive and sustainable?
7. Will the following assist in the segregation, collection and recycling of waste paper in
India? If yes, in what manner? Will the impact be sustainable?
a. Through active role of NGO’s
b. Through legislation
c. Through imposing penal action
d. Through incentives
e. Any other option
8. How can every citizen be-
a. Made aware of the importance and benefits of waste paper recycling
b. Made part of an overarching institutional mechanism for systematic and regular
segregation and collection of used paper/carton/packaging, etc.
16
c. Incentivised to inculcate habits of waste paper recycling
9. Can the “Green Dot” model be adopted in India? If yes, how? If not, why not?
17
Annexure-I
SOURCE SEGREGATION AND SCIENTIFIC HANDLING OF SOLID WASTE: A BUSINESS MODEL
1. The total urban population in India as per 2011 Census is 377.1 million, which
accounts for about 31.2% of India’s population.
2. Assuming that there are 4 persons in a normal household, the number of households
in the urban areas would be about 94 million.
3. It is estimated that a household consisting of 4 persons generates about 2.5
kilograms of garbage per day, which includes 30% or 750 grams of recyclables. In other
words, each household generates about 274 kilograms of recyclables per annum.
4. 94 million households in urban areas would, therefore, generate about 26.0 million
tonnes of recyclables per annum.
5. From the recyclables analysis, following is the break-up of various components:
Component % dry waste
Paper 50.0
Plastic 14.0
Metal 1.5
Glass 6.0
Wood 3.0
Textile 5.0
Residual waste & moisture
20.5
Therefore, the total quantity of recyclables in urban areas broken down into
different components would be as follows:
Component Fraction Quantity (million tonne)
Paper * 50% 13.0
Plastic 14% 3.6
Metal 1.5% 0.4
Glass 6% 1.6
Wood 3% 0.8
Textile 5% 1.3
Total Recyclables per annum 20.7 **
* This includes newspapers & magazines also. ** This excludes residual wastes and moisture.
18
6. Assuming that the following values are realizable for various dry recyclables
after sorting and baling, the total revenue generation would be:
Component Value in Rs (million) /annum
Paper Rs. 10000 per tonne X 13000000
130000
Plastic Rs.8000 per tonne X 3640000
29120
Metal Rs. 12000 per tonne X 390000
4680
Glass Rs. 3000 per tonne X 1560000
4680
Wood & Textile
Rs. 1500 per tonne X 2080000
3120
Total Value Realised ................... (A) 171600
7. Based on current data, actual cost of collection, segregation and baling per tonne of
dry recyclables works out to about Rs.6000/-.
Therefore, the total cost for collection of dry recyclables in the urban areas will be:
26 million tonnes X Rs.6000 = Rs. 156000 million per annum .......... (B)
8. Savings on account of reduced landfill, handling and logistics costs by source
segregation of recyclables is illustrated by the following example:
The Hyderabad Municipal Corporation spends Rs 170 million per month towards
collection, handling and transport of 4300 tonnes municipal solid waste per day for a
population of 7.0 million. If 30% recyclables are separated through source
segregation these costs would come down by Rs. 51 million per month.
Taking this figure as the basis, the total savings for a population of 377 million works
out to be Rs 32960.6 million per annum ............. (C)
Thus the Gross Realisation will be : Rs. 48560.6 million per annum......... (A+C - B).
This figure amounts to about 31.1% of cost of collection of waste.
The value addition would go up substantially through integrated municipal solid waste management and installation of recycling facilities, similar to the Hyderabad model.
19
Annexure-II
A. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK PREVAILING IN EU COUNTRIES FOR SUSTAINABLE
MANAGEMENT OF PACKAGING WASTE
The majority of Member States have implemented Packaging Regulations (The Directive
94/62/EC on Packaging and Packaging Waste) in 1997. Only Greece has not yet transposed
the EU Packaging Directive into national law. Depending on national waste management
traditions, the regulation of packaging waste recovery is accompanied by voluntary
agreements (Denmark, Netherlands). A number of Member States (Belgium, Denmark,
France, Portugal, and United Kingdom) have transposed the EU Packaging Directive in
regulating the recovery requirements and the environmental requirements in the design
and manufacture of packaging ("essential requirements") in separate legal acts. Table-1 lists
the legal basis for the transposition of the Packaging Directive.
Table-1: Legal basis
Country Legal basis
Austria Packaging Ordinance of 1992, amended 29th November 1996 Target Ordinance (Federal Law Gazette No.646/1992, as amended by 649/1996)
Belgium The Ecotax Act (Ordinary Law of 16th July 1993 aiming at completing the federal structure of the state) Interregional Co-operation agreement Packaging Decree of 30th of May 1996 (came into effect on 5th March 1997) Law of 21st December 1998 (essential requirements) The Royal Decree of the 25th of March 1999 defining standards for packaging
Denmark Statutory Order no. 298 of 30 April 1997 on certain requirements for packaging Statutory Order no. 299 of 30 April 1997 on waste Statutory Order no. 124 of February 27, 1989 on packaging for beer and soft drinks as amended by statutory order no. 540 of 1991 and no. 583 of 1996 and no. 300 of 30 April 1997
Finland Decision of Council of State on Packaging and Packaging Waste 1997 Law on Alcohol Excise no. 1471 of 29th December 1994 Law on Soft drinks Excise no. 1474 of 29th December 1994
France Lalonde Decree No 92-377 of April 1 1992, in force since January 1993, setting out conditions for the collection and the recovery of packaging waste produced in households. Decree No 94-609 of 13 July 1994 on packaging waste for which the holders are not households. Decree No 96-1008 on the disposal of household waste which contains the
20
quotas set by the European Packaging Directive. Decree No 98-638 of 20 July 1998 related to the environmental requirements in the design and manufacture of packaging.
Germany Packaging Ordinance of 1991, amended 21th August 1998
Greece Draft Law “Measures and conditions for the alternative management of packaging and other waste products. Foundation of the National Organisation for the Alternative Management of Packaging and Other Waste (NOAMPOW)”
Ireland Waste Management (Packaging) Regulations 1997 Waste Management (Farm Plastics) Regulations 1997 Waste Management (Packaging Amendment) Regulations 1998
Italy “Ronchi Decree” Law effective from 5th February 1997 implementing EC Directives (Directive on waste, hazardous waste and packaging waste) amended 28th November 1997
Luxembourg Grand Ducal Regulation of 31st October 1998
Portugal Decree-Law No.366-A/97 of 20th December 1997 (modified by Decree-Law No 162/2000 of 27th July 2000) Ordinance No 29-B/98 of January 1998 The Decree-Law No 407/98 of 21 December 1998 for essential requirements and maximal concentration of heavy metal
Spain Packaging Law 11/1997 of 24th April 1997 Royal Decree 782/98 of 30th April 1998 Law 10/1998 of April 21st 1998 Order 50/1998 of December 30th 1998 Order 50/1998 of 30th December 1998
Sweden Decree (1997-185) on producer responsibility for packaging
The Netherlands
Packaging and Packaging Waste Decree of July 4th 1997 Packaging Covenant II of 26 December 1997
U.K Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 Packaging Regulation (1998) Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations 1998 Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1999
System of Compliances
In all Member States economic operators within the packaging chain
(manufacturers, packers/fillers, distributors, and importers) are responsible for packaging
waste management, and for providing data on the amount of packaging put out in the
market. Except for Denmark, the industry has build up organisations in all Member States to
comply with the obligations imposed by national packaging regulations on behalf of the
individual businesses affected. However, economic operators generally have the option of
21
transferring their obligations to an external organisation (hereafter called compliance
scheme) or fulfilling their obligations by themselves.
Most of the compliance systems need to be approved and are monitored by the Ministry for
Environment or an independent body (e.g. packaging committee). The schemes co-ordinate
the activities necessary for the recovery of packaging waste and have an essential
interfacing role to play between the different actors within the packaging life cycle
(industries, public legal entities, consumers, recycling and recovery operators). In Austria
and the UK a competition scrutiny system is explicitly applicable to these organisations in
order to avoid monopolisation.
In eight Member States a "green dot" system has been established. By contracting
with the green dot system, the companies responsible for producing packaging entrust their
take-back obligation to the scheme in return for an annual fee based on the types of
packaging materials used, and on the amount of packaging put on the market. The printing
of the “green dot” is an indication that the “packaging producer responsible” financially
supports the integrated system of selective collection and recycling of its packaging waste.
The green dot systems are predominantly in charge of the management of
household/municipal packaging waste.
The United Kingdom has adopted the concept of "shared producer responsibility" for
packaging waste. This refers only to the industries which produce or use packaging.
Responsibility for recovery and recycling of packaging waste is divided among the
commercial enterprises which form part of the “packaging chain”, raw material producers,
packaging manufacturers, packer/fillers and sellers.
Except for Denmark and the United Kingdom, industry-based organisations are
established in all Member States to take over the responsibility for management and
recovery of municipal packaging waste. It is only in Belgium that the responsibility is only for
municipal waste and industrial packaging waste with two different organisations dealing
with the two waste streams.
In Austria, Finland, Ireland, The Netherlands and Italy the systems in place are
responsible for both municipal and industrial packaging waste. In Germany, the activity of
the nation-wide Der GrünePunkt – Duales System Deutschland GmbH (DSD) system was
restricted to sales packaging by the Federal Cartel Office. Systems for self-compliers have
22
started operating in competition to the DSD since the amendment of the Packaging
Ordinance in 1998.
Table-2 lists the main national packaging waste management organisations and summarises
the responsibility of these systems according to municipal/industrial packaging waste.
Table-2: Areas of activities of main compliance schemes
Country Organisation Responsible for Green Dot
Municipal packaging
Industrial packaging
Austria Branch organisations Yes Yes Yes
Belgium Fost + Val-I-Pack
Yes no
No Yes
Yes
Denmark Municipalities Yes (Yes)* no
Finland Pakkausalan Ympäristörekisteri PYR Oy (PYR)
Yes Yes no
France Eco-Emballages, Adelphe
Yes Yes
no no
Yes
Germany DSD different organisations
Yes (Yes)@
no Yes
Yes
Ireland Repak Yes Yes Yes
Italy ConsorzioNazionaleImballaggi (CONAI)
Yes Yes no
Luxembourg
Valorlux Yes No Yes
The Netherlands
SVM-Pact Yes Yes no
Portugal Sociedade Ponto Verde, S.A.(SPV)
Yes Yes Yes
Spain Ecoembalajes Ecovidrio
Yes Yes
no no
Yes
Sweden Reparegistret AB (REPA)
Yes No no
U.K Different organisation, e.g Valpak
No particular responsibility according
to this classification
no
* Municipalities are obliged to assign industrial packaging waste to recycling, which means that they have to prepare regulations that oblige enterprises to recycle their packaging waste. @ Since the amendment of the Packaging Ordinance in 1998, systems for self-compliers are in operation in competition with the Der GrünePunkt – Duales System Deutschland GmbH (DSD)
23
Share of Responsibility
In principle, the private sector is responsible for the packaging they put out in the
market. With regard to definite packaging waste management activities, the responsibility is
shared in the majority of Member States between municipalities and industry. While
collection and sorting of municipal packaging waste is predominately undertaken by the
public sector, the collection of industrial packaging waste and the recovery and recycling of
both municipal and industrial packaging waste is by the private sector.
In Austria and Germany, obligated economic operators are explicitly required to
organise the collection and sorting of domestic packaging waste and to comply with
recycling targets for this waste stream. The packaging regulations in these countries set out
criteria for the collection system, capacities and distances between collection points,
extensions of the collection system etc. The compliance schemes include contracts with
municipalities (and private operators) for the services necessary in the context of separate
collection and sorting of municipal packaging waste.
Table-3 provides an overview of the share of responsibility.
Table-3: Share of responsibility according to activity
Country Collection and sorting (municipal packaging)
Recovery
Austria ARGEV + other private organisation
Branch organisation responsible for recycling (Guarantors)
Belgium Municipalities Fost Plus
Denmark Municipalities Industry
Finland Municipalities PYR
France Municipalities Eco-Emballages, Adelphe
Germany DSD + other private organisation
Industry (Guarantors)
Ireland Municipalities Repak
Italy Municipalities CONAI
Luxembourg Municipalities Valorlux
Portugal Municipalities Ponto Verde + entities of packaging and raw packaging material manufacturers
Spain Municipalities Eco-embalajes
Sweden Material companies Material companies
The Netherlands Municipalities Industry
U. K. Municipalities Industry/compliance schemes
24
Collection Systems
Separate collection of municipal and industrial packing waste is carried out in all
Member States, but in varying degrees. In Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany the
Netherlands and Sweden for example, a well functioning reuse system, e.g. for glass, already
existed, and glass and paper were collected separately for recycling. Table -4 provides an
overview of the collection systems.
Table-4: Collection modalities (from households)
Country Extension of separate collection
Predominant collection system
Comments
Austria Nation-wide Mainly kerbside bring system for glass, paper and metals
Plastics: trend to collection of only recyclable plastic materials, other plastics are incinerated with energy recovery
Belgium Nearly nation-wide Kerbside sys. except for glass
Glass: 2 colours are separately collected PMC: empty plastics bottles and jars, metal cans and beverage cartons
Denmark Depending on local condition
Glass: colour separations only in few municipalities Paper: together with newspaper etc. Plastics: collection only in very few municipalities
Finland Mainly in urban regions
Bring-system Beverage carton is collected separately in yellow bins Kerbside system for glass
France Not yet fully established
Depending on local condition
Glass: predominately colour separate collection Plastics: empty plastic bottles and flasks metal cans
Germany Nation-wide Mainly kerbside bring system for glass and paper
Glass: separately collected, three colours Paper: together with magazines, newspaper, estimated packaging share 25% Plastics, metals composites: collected together (yellow bin)
Ireland Not yet fully Bring-system Glass and aluminium cans are
25
established separately collected, extension of collection scheme planed
Italy Mainly in northern region
Depending on local condition
Glass, paper, plastics and aluminium is separately collected
Luxembourg Bring system except for plastics bottles and flasks, metal cans and beverage cartons
Paper etc: collected together with newspapers etc. Empty plastics bottles and jars, metal cans and beverage cartons are collected in blue bags or via containers
Portugal Not yet fully established
Mainly bring-system in some areas kerbside system
Glass: collected mainly through green containers Papers: together with beverage cartons in blue containers Plastics, metals: together in yellow containers
Spain Not yet fully established
Mainly bring-system in some areas kerbside system
Glass: green containers Paper: blue containers Plastics, cans, beverage cartons in yellow containers
Sweden Nation-wide Bring-system
The Netherlands
Nation-wide (for glass and paper, cardboard)
Mainly Bring-system Glass: colour separate collection via bottle banks Paper and cardboard mainly via bring systems Plastics, metals, beverage cartons: collected separately on a small scale
U.K Some separate collection schemes
Mainly bring-system in some areas kerbside system
Glass: colour separate collection Bring systems for aluminium
Financing Of Packaging Waste Management
The work of the compliance schemes is financed by fees collected from companies
wishing to transfer the obligations imposed on them to the scheme. In general, the fee
structure is based on weight /volume/ type of packaging material, a fee per unit of
packaging or a membership /registration fee based on turnover.
26
Monitoring
The activities of the compliance schemes are monitored by the ministries of
Environment or other entities e.g. the Interregional Packaging Commission in Belgium and
the Agencies in the UK.
Prevailing Systems of Solid Waste Collection in Developed Countries
A number of different systems have been implemented to collect recyclables from
the general waste stream in developed countries. These systems lie along the spectrum of
trade-off between public convenience and government ease and expense. The three main
categories of collection are "drop-off centres", "buy-back centres" and "curbside collection".
Drop-off centres
Drop off centres require the waste producer to carry the recyclables to a central
location, which is either an installed or mobile collection station or is located at the
reprocessing plant itself. They are the easiest type of collection to establish, but suffer from
low and unpredictable throughput.
Buy-back centres
Buy-back centres differ in that the cleaned recyclables are purchased, thus providing
a clear incentive for use and creating a stable supply. The post-processed material can then
be sold, resulting in profits. The government subsidies are necessary to make buy-back
centres a viable enterprise, as according to the United States National Solid Wastes
Management Association it costs on average US$50 to process a tonne of material, which
can only be resold for US$30.
Curb-side collection
Curb-side collection encompasses many subtly different systems, which differ mostly
on where in the process the recyclables are sorted and cleaned. The main categories are
mixed waste collection, commingled recyclables and source separation. A waste collection
vehicle generally picks up the waste.
27
At one end of the spectrum is mixed waste collection, in which all recyclables are
collected, mixed in with the rest of the waste, and the desired material is then sorted out
and cleaned at a central sorting facility. This results in a large amount of recyclable waste,
paper especially, being too soiled to reprocess, but has advantages as well; the city need not
pay for a separate collection of recyclables and no public education is needed. Any changes
in the categories of recyclable materials is easy to accommodate as all sorting happens in a
central location.
In a Commingled or single-stream system, all recyclables for collection are mixed but
kept separate from other wastes. This greatly reduces the need for post-collection cleaning
but does require public education on what materials are recyclable.
Source separation is the other extreme, where each material is cleaned and sorted
prior to collection. This method requires the least post-collection sorting and produces the
purest recyclables, but incurs additional operating costs for collection of each separate
material. An extensive public education program is also required, which must be successful
if contamination among recyclables is to be avoided.
28
Annexure-III
POSITION PAPER ON THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SECTOR IN INDIA
A PIL was filed by Almitra H.Patel and others in the Supreme Court of India in 1996
regarding management of Municipal Solid Wastes. The Supreme Court subsequently set up
an Expert committee which submitted its report to the Supreme Court in March 1999 with
detailed recommendations. These were circulated to various stakeholders for
implementation.
To ensure compliance, the principal recommendations of the Supreme Court appointed
committee have been incorporated in the Municipal Solid Waste (Management and
Handling Rules 2000) notified by Ministry of Environment and Forests in September, 2000.
To improve the system, the following seven directions were issued:
(i) Prohibit littering on the streets by ensuring storage of waste at source in two bins: one
for biodegradable waste and another for recyclable material.
(ii) Primary collection of biodegradable and non biodegradable waste from the doorsteps
at pre-informed time on a day-to day basis using containerized tricycles/handcart/pick-
up vans.
(iii) Street sweeping covering all the residential and commercial areas on all the days of the
week irrespective of Sundays and holidays.
(iv) Abolition of open waste storage depots.
(v) Transportation of waste in covered vehicles on a day-to-day basis.
(vi) Treatment of biodegradable waste using composting or waste to energy technologies
meeting the standards laid down.
(vii) Minimize the waste going to the landfill and dispose of only rejects from the treatment
plants and inert material at the landfills as per the standards laid down in the rules.
The entire responsibility of implementation as well as development of required
infrastructure lies with Municipal authorities. They are directed to obtain authorization
from the state Pollution Control Boards/committees for setting up waste processing
and disposal facilities and furnish annual report of compliance.
Source : www.pppinindia.com/.../ppp_position_paper_solid_waste_mgmt_112k9.pdf
29
STATUS OF COMPLIANCE OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 2000 RULES PREPARED BY EXPERT COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND POVERTY ALLEVIATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA No consolidated official data are available about the status of compliance of MSW. However, figure 1 shows estimated percentages of compliance. Municipal authorities report numerous reasons for non-compliance with the 2000 rules. Those reasons are listed in table-11.
Figure-1: Compliance with the 2000 Rules
Source: Asnani 2004a.
41
33
38
72
29
52
9
1.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
storage at
source
segregation primary
collection
street
sweeping
storage
depots
transport processing disposal
perc
en
tag
e o
f co
mp
lin
ace
30
Table: Reasons for Noncompliance with the 2000 Rules
Area of compliance Reasons for noncompliance
Storage of waste at source Lack of public awareness, motivation and education Lack of civic sense and bad habits of people to litter Lack of cooperation from households, trade and commerce Lack of stringent panel provision Lack of powers to levy spot fines Lack of litter bins in the city Long distance between community bins Resistance to change in attitude
Segregation of recyclable waste Lack of wide publicity through electronic and print media Lack of public awareness and motivation, resulting in poor response
from citizens Lack of citizen’s understanding about how to use separate bins for
storage of recyclables Lack of sufficient knowledge of benefits of segregation Lack of cooperation and negative attitude of people Lack of finances to create awareness Difficulty of educating slum dwellers Lack of effective legal remedy
Collection of waste from doorstep Lack of awareness and motivation Unavailability of primary collection vehicles and equipment Insufficient response from citizens Lack of financial resources Difficulty of motivation slum dwellers Lack of personnel for door-to-door collection Lack of suitable containers
Daily sweeping of streets Excessive leave and absenteeism of sanitary workers Unavailability of workers on Sundays and public holidays Kuchha (unpaved) roads Lack of financial resources
Abolition of open waste storage depots and placement of containers
Shortage of containers Lack of financial resources Lack of planning for waste storage depots Inaccessible areas and narrow lanes that do not allow sufficient space
for containers
Transportation of waste in covered vehicles
Old vehicles that are difficult to replace
Processing of waste Lack of financial resources Lack of technical know-how Lack of skilled personnel Unavailability of appropriate land Lack of basic facilities to set up treatment plants Lack of institutional capacity
Disposal of waste at the engineered landfill
Lack of financial resources Lack of technical personnel Lack of technical know-how for scientific disposal of waste Unavailability of appropriate land Lack of institutional capacity
Source: Asnani 2004a.
Source : www.tn.gov.in/cma/swm_in_india.pdf(Page14-15)
31
IMPORTANT LEGAL DECISIONS IN THE YEAR 2004-2005
A. Supreme Court Matter
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 888/1996 [Almitra H. Patel & Another, Petitioners Versus Union
of India & Others., Respondents]; Order Dated 26.07.2004
The matter relates to the disposal of municipal solid wastes in terms of the Municipal
Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000. Upon hearing on 26.07.2004, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India observed that the Central Government had also not
responded to the matters related to the order dated 03.02.2004 passed earlier by the
Hon’ble Court. It was also learnt that some of the states have sought 80 per cent central
assistance for implementation of the project. The state of West Bengal had made an
affidavit dated 18.06.2004 in this regard.
The Hon’ble Court observed large scale noncompliance of the provisions of the Municipal
Solid Wastes Rules in the annual report (2002-2003) filed by the Central Pollution Control
Board.
Considering these facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Court directed that the Chief
Secretaries of States need to direct their State Pollution Control Boards to send their
Regional Officers and Environment Officers to pro-actively interact with the officials of
local bodies. An average of 5-6 local bodies should be dealt with and each should jointly
fill in and submit the local bodies’ annual report before the next hearing and report
compliance. The Hon’ble Court also directed that all Chief Secretaries need to direct the
State Pollution Control Board to file affidavit stating the reasons why applications already
applied for have not been approved within the stipulated time.
Source: www.wbpcb.gov.in/html/annualreps/ar0405/chapter_7.pdf
32
Annexure-IV
WASTE COLLECTION MODELS FOR BANGALORE AND HYDERABAD
BANGALORE MODEL
It is a joint venture for green initiative by Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), ITC,
RAMKY Group and Solid Waste Management Round table, Bangalore. The scope includes
setting up and Management of Dry Waste Collection Center (DWCC).
The BBMP provides rent free storage space for the waste. It makes the necessary
arrangements for delivery of Dry Waste (DW) to the DWCC. It is the duty of BBMP to
educate the public at large to adopt the concept of source segregation.
On its part, ITC/RAMKY manages the DWCC with required manpower, vehicles and other
expenses. The consortium receives the dry waste from the conservancy workers as well as
the public and makes the required payments to them. It carries out the secondary
segregation of the DW and sends the same for recycling.
Some details of the DWCC are summarised hereunder.
Area of DWCC 1500 sq ft.
No. of DWCC proposed to be set up 50 (Across various part of Bangalore)
Cost of 1 DWCC Rs. 4.0 million
Total Cost Rs. 200 million
Five DWCC will make one cluster, which will be managed by common staff. The activities are
likely to commence from September 2011. There are two Hub management options that are
open for adoption. The same are detailed hereunder.
Hub Management – Option 1
These options are put in place for the hubs operated by Ramky. Each cluster of five hubs
will be managed by an Area manager and an Accountant. At the hub level, there shall be
one manager and accountant assisted by receiving staff, six sorters, two balers and two
security personnel. BBMP conservancy workers shall bring segregated wastes from
households and deliver the same to the nearest hub. Waste paper collected by ITC’s
franchisees from other segments will also be deposited at the nearest hub.
33
Dry waste will be paid @ Rs 2 per kg to BBMP Conservancy Workers and in case of
Franchisees the payment shall be Rs 3.50 per kg inclusive of their collection expenses. Other
dry waste like newspaper, packaging paper, etc. will be offered a better price.
The following tables present the costs involved in the of Option –1
COST CARD FOR BANGALORE (In Rs.)
Man Power Nos. Amount Total Cost Per kg
Cost
COLLECTION COST
Area Manager 1 25000 25000 0.08
Area Accountant 1 20000 20000 0.07
Hub In charges 5 12000 60000 0.20
Hub Accountant 5 10000 50000 0.17
TOTAL COLLECTION EXP 0.52
HUB EXPENSES
Receiving staff 5 5000 25000 0.08
Sorters Salary 30 5000 150000 0.50
Balers Salary (Unloading, Baling & loading) 10 5000 50000 0.17
Watchmen Salary 10 5000 50000 0.17
Hub Rent (1000 Sft) (Ofce+Godown) 0 0 0 -
Miscellaneous Exp 1 25000 25000 0.08
TOTAL HUB EXP 300,000 1.00
Dry Recyclables Cost 4.5 1350000 4.50
PROMOTIONAL EXP 16,667 0.17
ADMIN EXPENSES (HO) 0.50
TOTAL COST PER kg DELIVERED TO MILL 6.69
Minimum Collections 300000 kg
34
Sale Realization - For option 1
Waste Proportion Target Qty in
Tonnes
Proportionate Qty in Tonnes
Sale Price Rs. Per Tonne
Total Sale amount (Rs.)
ONP 20% 300 60 10,000.00 600,000.00
Mixed waste
40% 120 7,000.00 840,000.00
White waste
15% 45 12,000.00 540,000.00
Plastics 15% 45 7,000.00 315,000.00
Corrugated Box
8% 24 7,500.00 180,000.00
Others 2% 6 - -
Total 300 2,475,000.00
Realization
per kg
8.25
Profit per annum for 3000 tonnes/month is Rs 45 million
Infrastructure requirement
Each hub requires following infrastructure
Infrastructure Quantity Cost (Rs.)
Electronic weighing scale (250 kg capacity)
1 15000
Manual baling machine 1 5000
Electrical Fitting (Light/Fan) 1 set 10000
Computer with printer 1 set 25000
Table, other furniture 1 set 10000
Partition of hub space - 75000
Miscellaneous Expenses - 10000
Total 1,50,000
Hub Management – Option 2
35
This option is proposed for the Hubs operated by Franchisees. It will be obligation of the
franchisee to place necessary staff / workers for operating the hub, including providing
expenses for all day to day working. The DW will be graded by the franchisee and a fair
price will be provided to them grade wise. The price will be cheaper by at least 50 paise per
kg as compared to the market price. BBMP workers and ITC franchisees will bring the
segregated wastes to the nearest hub.
HYDERABAD MODEL
The Hyderabad model is based on separate primary collection of dry and wet solid wastes.
These wastes are collected and transported to designated collection points. From the
collection points, these wastes are taken to the transfer stations. Here, the dry recyclables
are sorted out employing mechanized technology in to paper, plastic, metal, glass, wood,
textiles etc. The wet waste is treated to convert it to compost /biogas. The residual silt and
civil construction debris is disposed in secured landfills.
There are huge costs in handling Municipal Solid Waste starting from the source points to
disposal. Huge capital is required to install state of the art equipment to process the
municipal solid waste. Therefore, Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Management is possible,
provided the Government extends financial and infrastructure support as described below:
1) Reasonable tipping fee to be paid to the contractor in the range of Rs.1600 to
Rs.2000 per tonne to cover the cost of source segregation, primary
collections, movement of waste from collection points to the transfer
stations and from there to dumping yards.
2) Government should allocate land of about 500 Acres to handle the municipal
solid waste and create infrastructure like segregation and sorting system,
recycling complex, compost yards, power plants (waste energy), landfills and
instillations. For example a city of 7.0 million population like Hyderabad,
must have two waste management facilities, each of a minimum of 500 acres
in area.
3) It requires capital investment of about Rs. 10000 million.
4) Government to provide 100% grants for capital investment.
36
As a part of the project, four integrated waste management facilities are planned across
Hyderabad.
Capital Investment Rs. 9000 million for Phase I & II
Cost of Phase I Rs. 5000 million
Financial Assistance by AP Government
Rs. 2500 million (50% grant)
The Government of Andhra Pradesh will transfer all existing infrastructure including the
vehicles and machinery towards the project and will provide land license for transfer
stations and dumping yard for the period of 25 years.
Sources: ITC-WOW, 2011
37
Annexure-V
E-WASTE (MANAGEMENT AND HANDLING) RULES 2011
Source: Ministry of Environment and Forests Notification, 12th
May 2011 on e-waste (Management and Handling) Rules,
2011. moef.nic.in/ downloads/ rules-and-regulations/ 1035e_eng.pdf
The Ministry of Environment and Forests has recently notified the e-waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2011 which apply to every producer, consumer involved in the manufacture, sale, purchase, and processing of electrical and electronic equipment or components as specified in schedule I, collection center, dismantler and recycler of e-waste. The rule clearly defines the responsibility of each stakeholder in line with principle of “Extended Producer Responsibility”. The producer is responsible for - - Collection and channeling of e-waste to registered recycler or dismantler. - Setting up of collection centers or take back system individually or collectively - Financing and organizing a system to meet the costs involved in management of e-
waste generated. - Creating awareness through publications, advertisement, posters with regard to
information on management of e-waste and obtain authorization from State Pollution Control Board.
- File annual return in Form 3 to the State Pollution Control Board or Pollution Control Committee
Collection centers are responsible for - - Obtaining an authorization from the State Pollution Control Board. - To ensure that the e-waste collected by them is stored in a secured manner till it is
sent to registered dismantler(s) or recycler(s). - File annual return in Form 3 to the State Pollution Control Board or Pollution Control
Committee - Maintain records of the e-waste handled Dismantler is responsible for - - Obtaining an authorization from the State Pollution Control Board. - Ensure that no damage is caused to the environment during storage and
transportation. - Ensure that the facility and dismantling processes are in accordance with the
guidelines of Central Pollution Control Board. - File annual return in Form 3 to the State Pollution Control Board or Pollution Control
Committee Recycler is responsible for - - Obtaining an authorization from the State Pollution Control Board. - Ensure that the facility and recycling processes are in accordance with the guidelines
of Central Pollution Control Board. - Ensure that residue generated thereof is disposed off in a hazardous waste
treatment storage disposal facility. - File annual return in Form 3 to the State Pollution Control Board or Pollution Control
Committee
